Asia

Asia and the Obama victory

The devil they know

AT THE “Singapore Summit”, a gathering of Asia’s great and good held back in September, a speaker asked the audience of several hundred for a show of hands by those who thought Mitt Romney would win the American presidency. If a solitary palm reached for the sky, Banyan missed it. The almost unanimous expectation of Barack Obama’s re-election in part reflected the opinion polls at the time. But there was perhaps also an element of wishful thinking. If it had a vote in this election, much of Asia, though dissatisfied with many American policies of the past four years, would, like The Economist, have plumped for the devil they knew.

Ravi Velloor, foreign editor of the Straits Times in Singapore, summed up what is probably a common view in South-East Asia and the broader region in a front-page article finding “reason to cheer“ Mr Obama’s win. He expressed relief that “the world’s most powerful nation did not land in the hands of a novice at a time when Asia needs a seasoned hand at America’s wheel.”

That view was probably shared in China. Traditionally, if perversely, Chinese leaders have found Republican administrations easier to deal with, even if, like Democrats, Republicans tend to make fire-breathing threats towards China during election campaigns. And much in Mr Obama’s first term has alarmed China. He has called China an “adversary” as well as a potential partner, and many Chinese see his “pivot” of America’s military strategy towards Asia as a long-term plot to contain China’s rise. However, Mr Romney’s commitment to designate China a “currency manipulator” on day one of his presidency may have proved hollow. But it would have meant, at the very least, that China would become an issue from day one. And Mr Romney would certainly not have wanted to appear softer in military strategy than Mr Obama.

In the Chinese social media, the American election was the big issue on November 7th. The coincidence of its falling on the eve of the opening of the Chinese Communist Party’s 18th congress gave posters on Twitter-like services an obvious topic of conversation. One post, translated by the China Media Project at the University of Hong Kong, asked plaintively: “So when will we, in our Great Mother Country, be able to elect our own leaders?”

But another website, ChinaSMACK, translated a post that reflected a very common cynicism about the process: “Win or not has nothing to do with China; they will all be against China, containing our development.”

In Asia’s second-largest economy, Japan, there was probably also some relief at Mr Obama’s victory. At a time of great tension with China over the disputed Senkaku (Diaoyu) islands, “the security environment in East Asia is severe,” according to Osamu Fujimura, Japan’s chief cabinet secretary, so the alliance with America is even more important. Japan will welcome continuity.

India was one of the few countries in Asia where Mr Obama was rather unpopular in the early days of his administration. Loose talk of a “G2” with China made India feel undervalued; a brief attempt to push it to negotiate with Pakistan over the future of Kashmir was resented. However, in Indian eyes, Mr Obama has come a long way—especially in reaching a better understanding of the shortcomings of India’s rivals, China and Pakistan. A well-placed commentator thinks India will be happy with the prospect of “business as usual”.

Correspondingly, the one place where Mr Obama’s victory seems broadly unpopular is in Pakistan. Pakistanis are angry at his stepping up of unmanned “drone” raids on Pakistani territory. They have been further antagonised by bloody mishaps involving American troops and CIA contractors. And the episode which appeared such a triumph at home—the raid that killed Osama bin Laden at his comfy Pakistani hide-out—was seen as an outrageous breach of Pakistani sovereignty. So in a poll on the election conducted last month by the BBC in 21 countries, there was only one where Mr Romney was the more popular candidate: Pakistan. Of course, 20 out of 21 is a good score. But Pakistan, the source of Mr Obama’s “biggest single national-security concern”, is a bad loss.

Any foreign nation ecstatic about Obama being re-elected and the benefits they will receive are delusional. When he was first elected in 2008, Africa celebrated. Today, Africa is aware of the benefits of an Obama presidency : there aren't any.

Actually, Bush the younger did the most to tie American aid to good government, democracy, and human rights. He certainly did the most to fight Aids and Malaria in Africa. Obama has had a few photo ops, but his contribution has largely been to continue the initiatives of his predecessor. In the north of Africa, Obama's record in supporting the Arab spring and influencing it in a positive direction currently appears mixed.

He's pretty trigger happy with the drones. He, like Clinton, prefers to do his 'aggressive diplomacy' with bombs from an altitude rather than boots on the ground. Boots on the ground presidents are limited in their foreign adventures by the cost, human and otherwise. Presidents prepared to meet their goals through a kill list rather than an invasion will cause fewer casualties, but may cause more resentment and cynicism towards liberal democracy. How will the President defend his killings, for which there is no accountability or checks and balances, when some of his victims are (inevitably) found to be innocent? How will this President or future Presidents react when newer, cheaper drones start being used by Iranians, Indians, Pakistanis, Russians, Israelis, or the Chinese. The failure to provide a transparent (after the fact) and constitutional process clearly laid out in law with judicial checks and congressional oversight will come back to haunt the United States. Our failure to put limits on our 'drone diplomacy' will result in a growing free-for-all in the future.

All the 'feel good' about Us economy till now will start to recede slowly.The real problems in US as well as global economy will start to emerge as Us govt feel no need to suppress them any further..
I hope for a grater show by Obama administration in this term. Rather than slamming India and China for employment in their country,Us should concentrate of providing better business climate and making their citizens more competitive.

In developed countries, unlike in banana republics,leaders cannot afford to be impervious to the welfare of the people as it is difficult to mislead, nay, in naked terms, deceive the people for the obvious reason that people themselves act as watch dogs against the evil deeds of their leaders. It is altogether a different story in third world countries. Even in the early days of his public life Mr. Obama recognized this deficiency in awareness of the people in backward nations and wondered as to who asked the leaders of the under developed countries to grab their own people. Such a person who, even at the threshold of career realized the importance of honesty in public life came to be elected and re-elected to the highest office on earth without any kind of advantages associated with his descent. This indeed is great.. For this alone America deserves to be doubly congratulated.

Yes impervious; like the fiscal deficit you have in Europe and that Mr Obama is starting in the United States what is it the reasonable fiscal debt two times GDP?

That is a dishonest speech someone has to pay for everything, and if the welfare empowers people then it is right but when it has space for hobos the yopu got a problem. An you should rewiew the welfare system in undeveloped countries I guess we spent more money in Health care in Colombia, in proportional terms, and maybe in numbers solely, than the UK and the US do.

I am looking forward to see:
1) Vatican is relieved that Mormon guy did not become the President.
2) US population will become larger. (Now 280 million.)
3) Let's see what Jack Krugman says.
4) Let's see what Emmanuel Todd says.
Oh! I forgot Mr. Asad.
By the way, both of two candidates did not look intelligent enough for a President of U.S.
A country is known by the leader they have.

Nope, it says something about drone attacks and their fall-out. If you wish to argue about the 'need' for drone attacks, you should think about the 'need' for having US / NATO troops in Afghanistan in the first place.

The reelection of Obama farther confirms the decline of the US as a leading Western society. The new American population is increasingly made up of people whose origin are not from countries that share the true democratic values of the founding fathers. These new immigrants bring their own customs and values with them and one day will completely overshadow the principals that once made the US so attractive to many clever and enterprising individuals. Perhaps it is now a good time to look eastwards?

That is true but unfortunately that is not the way it is working out. I see in every group around me, many young people who look superficially like Americans but who are still holding on to their ancestral prejudices and bigoted views of people of other races and religions along with their own traditional disinterest in education and work ethics. Many of them make no effort to be part of the American nation intellectually but are only interested in making money or getting hold of it in anyway. In fact, I have seen some children of the newer immigrants who are more hostile to this country then their parents. Granted, this is not with all new immigrants, there are some who still appreciate the American values of old.

With few exceptions many of the earlier immigrants wanted to be Americans every way, one people one nation, there are many books about them and their achievements. The mosaic concept became popular in the nineteen seventies, before that it was always the idea of the melting pot.

The concept of the melting pot only became so in 1890s, in an attempt to assimilate hoards of earlier European immigrants in the cities. But prior to that America was more of a mosiac than a melting pot. The Amish are one hold over of that period, but in the late 19th to early 20th century, the Amish were the norm, not the exception.

Van Burne spoke Dutch as his first language, and he grew up in a Dutch speaking community. A mere 100 years ago, most schools even Public ones in Minnesota did NOT use English as the primary medium of instruction. Only 1/3 of them did. Abut 50% of them used German as primary language of instruction. When did Germany share democratic values? Definitely not in the 19th century, and definitely not in 1939.

What you say appears to be accurate, however, I am not sure about your reference to "US history text books are just plain garbage" since I have fortunate not come across any of that, though I will admit that I have read a few revisionism of the US history which many people see as facts in today's world. Let me make myself clearer, my initial comment was about the INTENT of the new immigrants to that of their predecessors. Their desire to learn about democratic principles of this nation and be a part of it while still enjoying their ancestral customs and religions. I very aware that all of America's immigrants have come diverse and checkered backgrounds.

You wrote "That is true but unfortunately that is not the way it is working out. I see in every group around me, many young people who look superficially like Americans but who are still holding on to their ancestral prejudices and bigoted views of people of other races and religions along with their own traditional disinterest in education and work ethics. Many of them make no effort to be part of the American nation intellectually but are only interested in making money or getting hold of it in anyway."

I wrote "I thought you were referring to white people in the deep-red states here in the US."

Okay, now I got it, I can see you were making assumptions, no, I am in the deepest blue city of America. My city is extremely multiracial with an overwhelming number of first and second generation immigrants, legal ones and illegals. Now, do you get it?

It will be a long term gain for the whole world if China can stop putting military bases all over the world, if China can stop sending troops thousands of miles away to other countries, if China can stop sending their Secretary of State to tell other countries what to do, if China can stop invading other countries...oh wait...

It will be a long term gain for the whole world if China can stop putting military bases all over the world, if China can stop sending troops thousands of miles away to other countries, if China can stop sending their Secretary of State to tell other countries what to do, if China can stop invading other countries...oh wait...
-----------------

It seems true that Obama victories are a result of Reverse racism..racism by non whites against whites. Instead of looking at intelligence, knowledge and deeds they vote on color.......In Islam e,g Black and white are considered equal...therefore voters should have seen their deeds and not color but majority of vote was color based which is bad.

The immigrants in the US are indeed changing its core values. There is just too much cosiness to democratic ideas.......so much so that the inherent character of USc might get lost and replaced by none other than chaos.

Your sexism and ignorance are showing. He won a large majority of white women. The other guy lost because he never convinced people that he cared about their problems. His party also sounded too sexist and racist. Americans, white and otherwise don't want that. They want a nation where all people have equal rights.

Commenting as someone who lives in a very multiracial community in America and who know people of many races, I am afraid you are very correct. Blacks voted for Obama in such a high number because he is black and a Democrat, if he were white the number would have be much smaller because the unemployment amongst the blacks is much higher then the rest of all Americans. White women voted against Romney because of abortion and other women's interests, Obama as a Democrat benefited from it. I asked many of the people I know to tell me who they were voting for and why, those are the main reasons given.

"Reverse racism" is an unnecessary distinction. Racism is racism. Much like rape is rape...no qualifiers needed. However, I disagree that is was the driving force here. Is it really any surprise that black Americans felt that a black man understood their interests better than Mitt Romney? Is it a shock to anyone that women voted for control of their own lives and choices? To suggest that the only reason people voted for Obama is due to his skin tone is a heinous statement that blindly discounts his significant accomplishments in academia and public service.

Why does the Asian perception of Obama v. Romney as the US president have to be about 'Which one is better for us?', as the Economist assumes? Why can't it be ideological/philosophical?

Americans of a Republican bent have no idea how unpopular Bush and his gang of neocons were to the rest of the world. And speaking as an Asian, I can assure you that the GOP's anti-academic, anti-government, libertarian radicalist dogma is simply incomprehensible to the vast majority of Asians. Most Asians, having lived in highly-regimented statist societies for something like two millenia, have a hard time even separating the government from the country and the society at large. We also tend to believe in the power of learning and the accuracy of expert opinions, something that the Republicans have learned to disregard in favour of their gut feelings.

So it really was no wonder that the Asians were quick to discount Romney's chances. It wasn't wishful thinking. We just couldn't understand how a candidate with such views could plausibly be considered for presidency of the world's premier nation.

Good comment Kim77! And, well, uh, I'm a single white male that grew up deep inside the US gov, got my first Diplomatic passport in 1957, and should understand at least a few things here and there. But Dangd if I could understand it either re your last paragraph.
;-)

"...speaking as an Asian, I can assure you that the GOP's anti-academic, anti-government, libertarian radicalist dogma is simply incomprehensible to the vast majority of Asians."

Got news for you Kim. Speaking as a Caucasian of Canadian and Australian background, the GOP's anti acedemic, anti government, and libertarian radicalist dogma is incomprehensible to just about everybody outside of the US.

Obama has been a safe pair of hands, or rather has used a safe pair of hands: Clinton's. What happens post-Clinton is a bit of a risk factor for the rest of the world, but nothing like the election of Romney and the regaining of influence by the Neo-con nitwits that sent the US into Iraq.

Sirs,
Come on TE old Friend. Flashman was/is a fictional character. So was/is Jeeves. Them Chinese et al been in this game ‘bout 4000 years longer than you. Though there was/is still much to admire about your brief luck-time then-episode commonly known as Empire, maybe it’s time to reconsider your efforts marketing this stuff. What does this election mean to you and Asia? Hozbout “Obama [Subtly] Unchained”? So gov, were not the seeds of the financial crises created in swanky offices in London? Come on old TE: Serve the real interests of your country, and the world to which you flog your wares. K? It's more profitable in the long run.
;-)

Oh, and leaving the EU? How can such a brilliant and clever nation think up and mumble such dumb ideas?
;-) x 2

Most of European coutries and Brazil has economy smaller than India. Did Any Indian leader or government said that we feel undervalued. Dont forget India refused Militry Intervention in Afganistan despite of invitation. We dont care for powers and anything, and yes untill America and China together attack us, we can defend ourselves economically and Millitry wise.
Now go outside and enjoy your life as we do in thick and thin.

Here's the rub to your belief ... we in the United States are about on the cusp of producing more natural gas than any other nation in the world...The only policies that are unsustainable is our military. Also unless china starts to work on the quality of their goods people are going to not trust them .. poisoned dog food and children's play things don't make for good publicity... part three.. the poor outnumber the rich in China at least 10 to 1 .. some day they might get pretty sick of that number ... as well as the pollution of their environment that far surpasses anything that we do.. Nor can the world handle a complete monetary collapse of the dollar, especially since the Euro is so unstable. Taxes are going to rise in the US .. embargo's on China will rise also .. we produce nearly enough oil to be Middle east free, let China see how much fun Islam is to deal with .. in conclusion don't hold you breath for a full on collapse.. no think that our debt is going to be a forever situation.

Economist: In Asia’s second-largest economy, Japan, there was probably also some relief at Mr Obama’s victory. At a time of great tension with China over the disputed Senkaku (Diaoyu) islands, “the security environment in East Asia is severe,” according to Osamu Fujimura, Japan’s chief cabinet secretary, so the alliance with America is even more important. Japan will welcome continuity."

Ironic given Japan's penchant for changing its leader roughly once a year.